Bizarre stuff. He's been untrustworthy since the Obamacare treason, but he was never THIS bad.
If this keeps up, Ann Coulter might have ironically been right about Roberts going full Souter on us. I doubt ANYONE (aside from Coulter herself, and she's known for saying shocking stuff just to get attention) could have predicted that back in 2005. I mean, the guy's wife is literally a card-carrying member of a pro-life organization. By all accounts he was a loyal Rehnquist clerk.
And I never gave much credit to the "Democrats are bribing Roberts with his kids being illegally adopted from overseas" conspiracy theory, but how else do you explain Roberts bizarre change of behavior? It's like Jekyll and Hyde. There was NO evidence Souter or Stevens were conservative in the FIRST place, just hearsay "trust me, the guy will be awesome for Republicans because the White House says so" anecdotes. (ditto with faux "originalist" Gorsuch, although I don't think he's nearly as bad as those two commies)
I've been having that sinking feeling for a while as well. Even in Trump got a third appointment and finally DID replace a commie judge with a 100% solid "pro-life judge in the Scalia mold", Gorsuch would just move further left to please his cocktail party pals inside the beltway. IMO, the fix is in.
>> draft impeachment proceedings just to put him on notice. They won’t impeach but it would be a severe rebuke nonetheless. <<
Ironically, Gerald Ford, who gave us that scumbag liberal traitor John Paul Stevens and never repented of it, had earlier himself tried to impeach a GOP-appointed SCOTUS judge for turning traitor and becoming a liberal activist. Specifically, he tried to start an impeachment inquiry against Earl Warren. It didn't get very far.
>> George W. Bush also appointed Samuel Alito, as solid a conservative as there has ever been on the Court. Roberts used to be a solid conservative vote too. He has changed. It has happened throughout the history of the Court. When you give someone a lifetime appointment there is no predicting what they will do decades down the line. <<
My point exactly as well. I don't think Trump has given us a solid Alito-type judge yet, while people sneer sarcastically "thanks Bush Jr. and Sr. for nothing", even though both of them DID accomplish that. IMO the scorecard so far is as follows:
Reagan: 2-2 (Rehnquist & Alito solid picks, O'Connor & Kennedy were meh)
GHWB: 1-1 (Thomas solid pick, Souter meh)
GWB: 1-1 (Alito solid pick, Roberts meh)
Trump: 0-2 (no solid picks... although the jury is still out on Kavanaugh and its POSSIBLE he could vote to overturn stuff like a "right" to homo marriage, so far its meh & meh)
IMO, instead of this "Impeach Roberts" stuff, how about "amend the constitution so these traitors can't stick around for decades destroying America, and make SCOTUS appointments last a maximum of 20 years or whenever they reach the age of 75, whichever comes first")
I think the latter effort would be far more useful.
>> On the other side of the aisle, Who are the SCOTUS Judges appointed by Democrat Presidents that have been turncoats? <<
I've said this numerous times on other threads: James Clark McRenyolds, Byron White. Yes, it's rare, but RAT judges assumed to be "Progressive" occasisonally turn traitor (just far less often than GOP judges do). No system is perfect.
But if we STOPPED the current method of just assuming the judge will vote awesome for the rest of their life because of what they CLAIM their "judicial philosophy" is, maybe our batting average would be more like 90% instead of 50%.
Just a suggestion.